Hot answers tagged grammar
9
This is just to add to Mike's answer, not to replace it.
Joshua does not transliterate into Greek exactly. There are letters in Hebrew that are simply not there in Greek. The Greek of Luke 3:29, Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8 all have Ἰησοῦ/s for Joshua. Translators render it as Joshua instead of Jesus because that is the name readers will be familiar with. ...
9
In Hebrew the name Joshua is:
יְהוֹשׁוּעַ Yehoshua or יְהוֹשֻׁעַ Yehoshua “the LORD is salvation.”
In Greek it is the transliteration of the Hebrew:
Ιησους (Iēsous, sounds like ee-ay-soos).
Therefore in the Greek New Testament Jesus and Joshua are both Iēsous.
Up until now the names are the same and even in the Latin Vulgate they remained the same. In ...
7
Gesenius in his Hebrew Grammar (Kautzsch/Cowley edition, commonly GKC) spends several pages on "Agreement between Members of a Sentence, especially between Subject and Predicate in respect of Gender and Number." He gives many examples of when the number of the verb and the noun disagree. This is section 145 of the book. In my edition, this is page ...
6
According to Fr. Patrick Henry Reardon1, the spelling difference is inconsequential. The spelling difference does not change the meaning and has more to do with transliteration (from Greek) than translation. The only way of distinguishing grammatical number is through diacritics, which were not added to the language until a couple centuries after the writing ...
5
I know that the other answers explain this in more depth, but the simple answer is really that the early Christians read the Greek Septuagint (LXX), and this translation of the Hebrew Tanakh and apocryphal works rendered יֵשׁוּעַ / יְהוֹשֻׁעַ as Ἰησοῦς. From there it was transliterated into Latin (Iesus) and became the name associated with the Christian ...
5
I think you may be trying to read far too much into this verse that the grammar won't support. The first translation of each verse in its simplest form is really the best translation and says pretty much everything the grammar allows. The rest is reading more into the text than the grammar would support. I also think you are misunderstanding some of the ...
5
John 14:15 reads in the NA27 (and NA28):
Ἐὰν ἀγαπᾶτέ με, τὰς ἐντολὰς τὰς ἐμὰς τηρήσετε
However, there is a manuscript discrepancy that would render the last word as τηρήσατε. According to Metzger in his Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (2nd ed.),
A majority of the Committee preferred the future tense τηρήσετε, read
by B L Ψ 1010 1071 ...
5
Here's the problem concerning the singular/plural distinction: I found an online Peshitta forum post by Paul Younan (who prepared a scholarly Peshitta text) that mentions that there was no way to distinguish between the singular and plural in Aramaic until at least the 6th century. He states:
Notice the only difference between the two is the Syame ...
3
I am not able to paste Aramaic letters on my computer (or on this site) but you can see that the Sabbath and week are not the same. An example where both words are used is Mathew 28:1. The interlinear Aramaic and English version can be found here.
http://www.peshitta.org/pdf/Mattich28.pdf
The literal Aramaic in English reads like this: “of the week the ...
2
The difference in translations is based on recognition of existing textual variants.
According to the 1550 Stephanus, the Greek verb is τηρήσατε which is conjugated in the 2nd person, plural number, imperative mood. Therefore, it would be a command, not an observation (which would be the indicative mood).
According to the Nestle-Aland 27th edition, the ...
2
καταλλάγητε is the 2nd plural aorist passive imperative of καταλλάσσω.
Breaking this down, 2nd plural is you (all) "y'all." Passive makes the subject of the verb the recipient of the action. Imperatives are commands and aorist imperatives generally indicate a command to start something.
So what would "we reconcile them" look like? καταλλάσoμεν αὐτοῦς.
...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
